Your most unpopular opinion about league

[Tacky]

The refs aren't ruining the game. The fans complain about the refs in every single sport around the world.

 

[Spud_Murphy]

Imagine if Sam Burgess eye gouged Jake friend…hed cop 8-12 weeks

But not Daly Cherry Evans...no, hes OK, MRC deemed it nothing

How crooked is this game?
Several times per year I wonder why I give them my hard earned

Yes it's all very unbalanced and unfair. What's good for one lot is not good for the other lot and so on- there is no consistency and interpretation of the rules is all over the place depending on who's playing who. I really don't understand it.

Apart from a period when Greg Hartley was making waves, I don't recall ever seeing the refs officiate games with such overwhelming bias that they directly affect the outcome of matches. Now, it happens at least once or twice every week and it's so blatantly obvious, yet no one does anything about it!

 

[Chicken_Faced_Killa]

The refs aren't ruining the game. The fans complain about the refs in every single sport around the world.

I agree with this, the refs make a few errors but on the whole do a great job but all anyone focused on is the mistakes.

 

[Marshall_magic]

Maybe not unpopular, but I hate players playing the ball off the mark and getting a penalty because the markers are made not square. I would change the rule so if an attacking player plays the ball off the mark then no defender can be called offside on the following play.

 

[happy_tiger]

Maybe not unpopular, but I hate players playing the ball off the mark and getting a penalty because the markers are made not square. I would change the rule so if an attacking player plays the ball off the mark then no defender can be called offside on the following play.

And if the marker is standing on the mark the attacker gets penalized

You did that for two weeks and it would stop asap

Then again we are as guilty as any other team for doing it , especially our back 5

 

[Onthebus]

The game in general is run by a bunch of people who have no idea what so ever.

It's embarrassing that the average game attracts around 12,000, should be doing more to get people to games instead of watching it on TV

 

[BalmainBoy]

The game in general is run by a bunch of people who have no idea what so ever.

It's embarrassing that the average game attracts around 12,000, should be doing more to get people to games instead of watching it on TV

I prefer to watch on TV than go to the game.
That's my fault. Not the NRL's

 

[king_sirro]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

 

[Russell]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

Definitely agree on the Walters/Elias issue.

Haven't thought about FB play at this stage.

 

[Chicken_Faced_Killa]

Here’s one I have:

The on field refs are doing a good job. Yes they make occasional errors but these are far less than what they get right.

 

[happy_tiger]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

Benny for what its worth is a different era , and played a different style

Benny had to win scrum's and could rake the ball from the play the ball

Walters is from the new era and led the change into that era , and when you compare Benny to Steve Walters in Walters era ,Walters wins , he was better than Benny , stronger defender

And then came along Cammy and he smashes them all out of the park

 

[happy_tiger]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

Lockyer /Slater is a tough one

I think Slater took it to a far different level , Cameron Smith commented on this once , said Locky was a better 6 than 1 and Slater was the 2.0 on Locky at 1

 

[The_Patriot]

Not sure if this will be unpopular, but I absolutely loathe the zero tackle restart. Several reasons:
1) It doesn't do what it's meant to. The idea was to encourage attacking play by introducing effectively a penalty for 'negative' kicking dead, but in fact all it does is make teams more conservative in attack.
2) It's palpably unfair. Drop a ball just short of the try line, the oppo gets a normal set starting with a scrum on 10m. Drop the same ball over the line, zero tackle set 20m out. If you put a lot of pressure on a team and end up having a video ref multiply reviewing grounding, you really don't deserve to see all that pressure evaporate if you didn't quite ground the ball.
3) It's obvious why it's never criticised: because it creates more attacking opportunities and thus more excitement. Who cares if it's unfair, if it means more sets ending in attacking positions rather than in midfield? In which case, why not just start all sets on 20m and zero tackles? Or half way?

The annoying thing is there's an incredibly obvious fix out there that no-one discusses. If the idea of the rule change was to stop defensive kicking, just make it so it only applies to kicks from outside the 20m or 30m line. That way you take kicks dead on purpose out of the game but don't penalise genuine attacking kicks.

I guess in theory a team leading narrowly in the final minutes that gets close to the opposition line would just kick dead. But they do anyway - just to the touchline. That's a slightly higher degree of difficulty kick than just booting it through the in-goal… but it's hardly a major element of the game.

agreed, but maybe just make it that (similar to a kick out on the full), the defending team gets the ball back from wherever it was kicked dead with a minimum of 20m. so if you belt it dead from 50 out the other team gets it at halfway

Awesome work, you two guys have solved the issue and meanwhile the NRL is clueless.

Someone send this into them, it really is the way forward.

 

[Cairnstigers]

Let the video ref check for forward passes before a try is awarded or disallowed

 

[innsaneink]

The quick tap rule = unfair…like old mate above stating the 7 tackle rule is unfair

hate it...we arent good at it, we dont fight in tackles and move off the mark...I see teams - especially penrith Rooster & melbourne steal metres in every play the ball in possesion, markers are never set...iknow we get hammered enough by refs as it is but we toe the line too much in this facet imo

 

[king_sirro]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

Benny for what its worth is a different era , and played a different style

Benny had to win scrum's and could rake the ball from the play the ball

Walters is from the new era and led the change into that era , and when you compare Benny to Steve Walters in Walters era ,Walters wins , he was better than Benny , stronger defender

And then came along Cammy and he smashes them all out of the park

We've had this argument before old fella. Not taking anything away from Walters as a player. However, when you look at the comment "changed the way hookers play" which is often said when talking about Walter's, how did he do that? Steve was a hard running, no nonsense hooker, how is that changing how hookers play? Benny on the other hand, was the first halfback style hooker. An ability to kick, speed out of the ruck, getting into first receiver at times, ball playing. He had more of an effect on the hooking role. Not saying he is a better player then Walter's, that's a different argument (although I do think benny is better), I'm saying he had more impact on how hookers play then Walters. I just cant see how it can be perceived otherwise.

The Slater/Lockyer argument is a no brainer to for me. I have heard so many times that Slater changed how fullbacks play and he was the first ball playing fullback. Well that's just plain ridiculous and simply not true. Again, the argument isn't who is better, its who had more influence on the positions style of play. Its clearly Lockyer. (By the way, I also rate Lockyer a better fullback then Slater, Locky was incredible).

 

[Geo]

Benny bit himself to get Mario sent off so he wins…

 

[happy_tiger]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

Benny for what its worth is a different era , and played a different style

Benny had to win scrum's and could rake the ball from the play the ball

Walters is from the new era and led the change into that era , and when you compare Benny to Steve Walters in Walters era ,Walters wins , he was better than Benny , stronger defender

And then came along Cammy and he smashes them all out of the park

We've had this argument before old fella. Not taking anything away from Walters as a player. However, when you look at the comment "changed the way hookers play" which is often said when talking about Walter's, how did he do that? Steve was a hard running, no nonsense hooker, how is that changing how hookers play? Benny on the other hand, was the first halfback style hooker. An ability to kick, speed out of the ruck, getting into first receiver at times, ball playing. He had more of an effect on the hooking role. Not saying he is a better player then Walter's, that's a different argument (although I do think benny is better), I'm saying he had more impact on how hookers play then Walters. I just cant see how it can be perceived otherwise.

The Slater/Lockyer argument is a no brainer to for me. I have heard so many times that Slater changed how fullbacks play and he was the first ball playing fullback. Well that's just plain ridiculous and simply not true. Again, the argument isn't who is better, its who had more influence on the positions style of play. Its clearly Lockyer. (By the way, I also rate Lockyer a better fullback then Slater, Locky was incredible).

Yeah I know , one day we will have to have a brew together to discuss it :smiley:

 

[king_sirro]

2 unpopular opinions I have are

1.Steve Walter's did NOT change the way hookers played, Benny Elias did.

2.Billy Slater did NOT change the way fullbacks play, Darren Lockyer did that.

Cant stand how so many people refer to Walters and Slater as revolutionaries. Both Elias and Lockyer had much more of an impact on their respective positions

Benny for what its worth is a different era , and played a different style

Benny had to win scrum's and could rake the ball from the play the ball

Walters is from the new era and led the change into that era , and when you compare Benny to Steve Walters in Walters era ,Walters wins , he was better than Benny , stronger defender

And then came along Cammy and he smashes them all out of the park

We've had this argument before old fella. Not taking anything away from Walters as a player. However, when you look at the comment "changed the way hookers play" which is often said when talking about Walter's, how did he do that? Steve was a hard running, no nonsense hooker, how is that changing how hookers play? Benny on the other hand, was the first halfback style hooker. An ability to kick, speed out of the ruck, getting into first receiver at times, ball playing. He had more of an effect on the hooking role. Not saying he is a better player then Walter's, that's a different argument (although I do think benny is better), I'm saying he had more impact on how hookers play then Walters. I just cant see how it can be perceived otherwise.

The Slater/Lockyer argument is a no brainer to for me. I have heard so many times that Slater changed how fullbacks play and he was the first ball playing fullback. Well that's just plain ridiculous and simply not true. Again, the argument isn't who is better, its who had more influence on the positions style of play. Its clearly Lockyer. (By the way, I also rate Lockyer a better fullback then Slater, Locky was incredible).

Yeah I know , one day we will have to have a brew together to discuss it :smiley:

Not XXXX though

 

[happy_tiger]

Benny for what its worth is a different era , and played a different style

Benny had to win scrum's and could rake the ball from the play the ball

Walters is from the new era and led the change into that era , and when you compare Benny to Steve Walters in Walters era ,Walters wins , he was better than Benny , stronger defender

And then came along Cammy and he smashes them all out of the park

We've had this argument before old fella. Not taking anything away from Walters as a player. However, when you look at the comment "changed the way hookers play" which is often said when talking about Walter's, how did he do that? Steve was a hard running, no nonsense hooker, how is that changing how hookers play? Benny on the other hand, was the first halfback style hooker. An ability to kick, speed out of the ruck, getting into first receiver at times, ball playing. He had more of an effect on the hooking role. Not saying he is a better player then Walter's, that's a different argument (although I do think benny is better), I'm saying he had more impact on how hookers play then Walters. I just cant see how it can be perceived otherwise.

The Slater/Lockyer argument is a no brainer to for me. I have heard so many times that Slater changed how fullbacks play and he was the first ball playing fullback. Well that's just plain ridiculous and simply not true. Again, the argument isn't who is better, its who had more influence on the positions style of play. Its clearly Lockyer. (By the way, I also rate Lockyer a better fullback then Slater, Locky was incredible).

Yeah I know , one day we will have to have a brew together to discuss it :smiley:

Not XXXX though

And pass on a Toohey's or two :laughing: