Recently, former NRL player turned businessman and social media influencer Isaac John tagged 7th Touch in a reel of his on Instagram where he voiced an idea that he had about creating a short-form, hybrid-type spectacle for Touch.
His idea? A mini-tournament where teams battle it out 6v6 on the 7m line. This concept, albeit informally, has been around for ages in our sport. You know the one. We could train on the 7m (formerly 5m) for hours on end trying out our best moves, steps, flick passes and acrobatic dives to see what would come off. Everyone who watches our sport loves the 7m. John's thinking was that it would be easy to follow, easy to market, and it would remove the “boring” part of Touch - the midfield (his words, not mine!), and instead focus solely on the highlight of Touch: the 7m.
New Zealand's Ifor Jones would easily be a player to watch in a 7m 6-on-6 format.
Now immediately I was skeptical. The Touch purist in me scoffed at the idea and thought it was ludicrous. ‘That won’t work,’ I thought. ‘It takes away the essence of the game. How dare he suggest that the battle of the ruck is “boring”?!’
But then after a minute or two I thought, ‘Well, hang on…’
My mistake was thinking that this format would be designed to try and compete with, or take over Touch. In reality, this format only takes on certain Touch elements before being repurposed pretty much specifically for social media, all with the goal of getting more eyes and ears on the sport. As humans, I'm sure you've heard it before, our attention span is getting shorter with each passing day. We crave instant gratification. If this bite-sized version can bring in more exposure to Touch in a 20-second reel vs a 40-minute game, it could potentially act as a funnel to get more players - especially young people, which is key - involved in the actual format that we know and love, not to mention sponsors, funders, etc.
Now I understand there are concerns. I saw them all in the comments section as well as in my DMs.
‘It takes away the midfield, one of the most valuable aspects of Touch’.
‘It won’t transfer to the actual game well at all’.
‘It will promote bad attacking/defensive habits’.
‘It removes the nuance of the sport’.
‘The “highlight culture” will ruin Touch’.
Etc., etc.
Trust me, I get it. But do you want the truth? Whether you like it or not, the sporting landscape as a whole is changing. And if Touch doesn't move with the times, we’ll fall by the wayside.
Want an example? Look at T20 cricket. When it came along in the 2000s, there was mixed reception. Some thought it had the potential to reinvigorate the sport. Cricket purists, on the other hand, thought it would be a death knell. Fast forward 20-odd years and T20 cricket thrives as a shorter, more entertaining form of the game that appeals to a different demographic while still having the ODI and Test format for cricket traditionalists.
Baller League in the UK is branded as a 'new era' of football.
Not sold? Look at both the Kings League and Baller League in Europe in this current day and age. Hybrid forms of football played indoors with six- or seven-a-side and unique rule changes to create a more entertaining product. It's broadcast live and free on Youtube and has a huge social following. Additionally, to make it even more over-the-top, they incorporate celebrities and influencers to get the product in front of the eyes of millions worldwide. Now, do these competitions take away from, say, the Premier League or La Liga or the UEFA Champions League? Absolutely not. If anything, it captures an even wider audience for football.
Still unsure? Look at the (yes, controversial) RunIt Championship League in Australia. A 1v1 off-shoot of rugby league/union played on a 20m x 4m field that glamorises the gladiatorial nature of contact sport, all for a $200k cash prize. Now personally I’m not huge on it, nor do I endorse it, but no one can deny the waves it has made on social media. And — if we can put the controversy to the side for a second — if it’s purely the concept of a fit-for-purpose, hybrid game that we’re talking about? This is the blueprint.
So there is precedent. The idea of a 6 v 6 7m game has merit. It can be done. Whether it will be done? That might be answered sooner than you’d expect.