How to fix The Wrestle: a 12- and 18-step program
An open letter to supreme swinging benevolent dictator Peter V'landys about a plan to rid rugby league of the disingenuous dance of death known as The Wrestle. Warning: this may hurt a bit.
Mr V’landys. Peter. Oh great big cheeseman.
A word.
After watching Manly Warringah Sea Eagles quite wilfully concede six set restarts in their round five fixture against Newcastle Knights on Thursday night - and this a week after laying upon Canberra Raiders in Mudgee like they liked them a little too much - it behoves me - that’s right, it behoves me - to offer your National Rugby League a plan to rid the game of this tactic, this scourge, this disingenuous blight upon modern rugby league.
Peter? I give you the Tackle Count Top-Up.
Hear me out.
As you know, the physical ‘dance’ called ‘The Wrestle’ isn’t ‘tackling’, per se – it’s not designed to halt the attacker. It’s designed only to slow the attacker from playing the ball and allowing the defensive line time to form.
And do not whatever you do start me upon the third defender coming in around the calves to bring an attacker down, for that is nothing but a cynical dance and a blight upon the game.
It’s the demon spawn of the rolling maul of dear, derided cousin rugby union. At least that odd, obstructionist bit of kit has positive intent. And to mess with it low is penalised.
The Wrestle should have no place in a game as physical, fast and rock-n-roll as our rugby league.
Tackle the man, get the hell off.
And repeat.
So, as a man of action, Peter, as the benevolent swinging dictator rugby league didn’t know it needed until you turned up and became, let’s rub it out.
Let’s just make it … not a thing.
Let’s kill The Wrestle.
And let’s do it with the tried and the true: carrots and sticks.
Mostly sticks, it must be said. Indeed quite big sticks, followed by progressively bigger ones.
Big sticks?
Not ‘six again’ but rather ‘six more’ on top of the original fresh six.
Yes, Pete - I’m talking 12-tackle sets.
I’m talking 18-tackle sets.
I’m talking sin bins of shame for repeated offence.
Continue to hear me out.
Those penalties in the 40m zone as teams come out of danger appear to do their thing. Like ‘em. Stand easy, penalties in the 40m zone.
But the restart of sets through ‘six again’, while it has been very good, indeed a revelation, is no longer deterrent enough.
Manly gave away six in their (well deserved) 30-6 win over Newcastle Knights, and didn’t look like they gave a stuff. They also conceded eight penalties.
They employed similar slow-down tactics against Canberra Raiders and, again, very much deserved to win.
Now, as you know, so important is it for teams to slow play-the-ball and thus line up a committed and ‘set’ defensive wall against attackers, defenders are willing to slow things down and cop 6-, 7- or 8-tackle sets.
It’s the same with penalties near the line. Out comes the captain to question the referee and slow it all down to give their defensive line time to get ready.
It’s bullshit, Pete. A disingenuous dance. A farce. We both know it. And hard-eyed professional coaches know it. But it is not their concern for “The Game”. Their only concern is for “The W”.
So let’s do this: instead of ‘six again’ let’s have ‘six more’. An additional six. On top of the fresh six, you get another six.
Slow the ball down and the attacking team gets 12 tackles.
Infringe again in the passage? Attackers get 18 tackles. Effectively unlimited tackles. We’ll top it out at 18.
Infringe again? It’s back up to 18 tackles and off you go for 10 minutes in the bin.
Infringe again? Are you mad? Do you need HIA? It’s a fresh set of 18 and you’re off for ten, too, Bubba, and can watch from the Bench of Shame with your mate as your team defends an 18-tackle set with 11 men.
Nobody wants that, least of all said pro coaches.
See how popular a wrestler is with Coach then. And see how much Coach wants his men to slow things down and risk tackling all day without enough players.
See what that does to the “W” column.
Commentators and coaches would howl, of course, for that is their way. There may be teething issues. Change any rule there are consequences.
And one of them would be open and free-flowing, entertaining rugby league, the best kind of rugby league.
Yes - defence has a place. There was a time, and it wasn’t that long ago, coaches taught ‘one up, one down’. Meaning first man in goes low, next man is high to wrap the ball, prevent the offload.
Today, anachronism. It’s two up to prevent offload and slow it down, and a third man in to bring the player down, slowly.
We can kill that. For if your only role following the ‘hit’ is to ‘wrestle’ the player and prevent him playing the ball quickly, then you dance with the devil.
Hell, the new rule - I’ll go with Tackle Count Top-Up, but brand it what you will - is worth a crack for no other reason than ridding the game of said third man in around the calves action. Because that is shit. It’s only about slowing the play down. And it’s only obviously about that. For mine, you rip off that action, it’s immediate tackle count top-up for the other mob.
Of course, you may get away with The Wrestle, a time or two. Players are smart and adaptive. They overcome.
But the risk of giving away a 12- or 18-tackle set to an opponent and thus sending so many giant marauders at your line, time and again, would surely make coaches re-think tactics.
And, just maybe, stop the bloody wrestle.
In other news, buy my book.
