Wednesday 30 March 2016 15:55, UK
Did you have a good Easter? Well I guess it depends on which team you follow.
The six games in round eight of Super League on Monday were arguably the most exciting of the season so far. Some people may argue that the quality wasn't as good as in other rounds, but the end of game excitement in most matches hasn't been higher.
The last few seconds of the Leeds v Wakefield clash were as dramatic as you'll see. Professional sport needs uncertainty of outcome and with three of the six games going into the last 60 seconds with the result still in the balance I enjoyed it immensely.
Warrington Wolves boss Tony Smith has been consistent with his campaign to alter the fixture schedule so that we only have one match over Easter weekend. I admire his perseverance and consistency here, even though I'm not certain I agree with him.
I saw a quote which implied he felt that we were subjecting the players to some sort of "cruelty" by asking them to play twice in a four-day period. I have no doubt that the players will not have fully recovered before the second match but I'm not certain it's the biggest problem that the game has. The fact that the players earn about the same now as they did 10 and 20 years ago is a bigger issue.
It is interesting that the NRL allows its players to play in a State of Origin game and then back up and play for their club team two or three days later. It must be a massive drain both mentally and physically but players aren't prevented from doing it. How much is too much?
I am aware of some clubs who encourage players to play when rest might be the better option.
I think that Tony's point opens up a fascinating discussion on the wider issue of player welfare. How many games should a player be able to play in a season? Should that be a player's choice or one that the administrators make? Some players like Sonny Bill Williams like to take control of their own career and workload, is it better for the player to determine his own journey?
Some of the men who played on Easter Monday must have had at the very least some minor injuries and muscle soreness from their efforts on Good Friday, but that must also be the case for other rounds in Super League.
Some clubs facilitate pain killing injections prior to a game; is that encouraging a form of cruelty? Perhaps not at Warrington but I am aware of some clubs who encourage players to play when rest might be the better option.
I am not sure that we are consistent when we talk about player welfare. We sometimes see players leave the field with what looks like a serious head injury only to return to the action 15 minutes later. That could be even worse than playing twice over Easter.
This area of player workload is one in which the players have sadly lacked a voice, or one that I have failed to hear. I know of one club which asked their players if they would prefer to play once over Easter and take a pay cut. The majority voted to leave things as they are.
Clubs make money from games and without them they have less to pay the players, or that is at least how the clubs explain it. If club incomes have increased over the last 20 years, why have the player salaries stayed the same? That is the question that the players need to ask.
I am not aware of a movement by the players to reduce the fixtures or alter the Easter programme, although Tony and the other coaches may correct me here. I understand that some coaches sometimes make public comments to win favour with their players, although I am not suggesting again that Tony has done this here.
American Football has a players union who are strong enough to not just have a say over the fixtures but even to limit the amount of contact work the players have to do during training. Over there, the clubs have limits placed upon them so that they cannot overtrain the players. In fact, they are not even allowed to make contact with their players during the off-season.
Tony Smith annually opens a fascinating box here. If we restrict or limit the number of games that a player can play, possibly restricting his earning potential, will the players restrict the amount of training that they do?
If this enabled them to elongate their careers and earn more money than I would say yes. Do we need to limit the training not just the matches?
