Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Talk about NRL, State of Origin, Tests, Four Nations, World Cup, everything rugby league

Moderator: GH Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Sid
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9937
Joined: May 15, 2015, 8:47 pm
Favourite Player: Shannon Boyd
Location: Darwin, N.T.

Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by Sid »

I thought I'd start this thread before a ball is kicked in anger for the 2017 season,
so that it doesn't get confused with complaining about specific recent rulings.
This is more so aimed at general Rugby League rules that are in place
that you'd like to see interpreted differently or stop being ignored altogether every week on a consistent basis
to help make the game a better spectacle.

- Playing the ball on the mark
This one is my biggest bugbear.

I'm not referring so much to players getting away with over stepping the mark towards the goal line and getting away with it,
as the referee's do pull this up and rightfully so. I'm referring to how some teams/players are consistently taking a gigantic
step or 2 to the side before playing the ball, which is effectively causing the markers to be in an offside position even though they are really the players in the correct position for the play the ball. Effectively taking 2 players out of the next play is a massive advantage to the attacking side.

I'd like to see referee's pull players up for this as well and make them re-play the ball as they would if they over step the mark towards the goal line.

- Goal line defence to begin from the goal line
To be honest I've lost track of whether defenders need 1 or 2 feet on/behind the goal line when the opposition are playing the ball within the 10, but it appears that so long as players are close enough to the goal line that it's okay. The problem I have with this is that it leaves a grey area of how close is close enough when there is a clear mark on the ground that should be used as a guide for this instead.

- Sin Bin for repeat offences
I'm mostly referring to the tactic of giving away goal line penalty after goal line penalty (if the score line suits the defending team to do this) Coaches have openly stated that they use this as a tactic and why wouldn't they if they can get away with it.
I think it's bad for the game when a side is advantaged for giving away penalties (I realise this is also the case in basketball where the team losing will give away penalty shots in the dying moments to allow more time to claw back the score)
I'd ideally like to see 5 minute penalties for this, for the 3rd offence in a row to whoever is doing the tackle at the time (like what happens in my RLL3 game) however while the rules currently state it's supposed to be a 10 minute sin bin, then I'd like to see it officiated that way.

- No "evening up" penalties
In my opinion there seems to be a trend that referees will try to even up the penalty count so not to look biased.
This makes the game sloppier all round if teams know that no matter how ill disciplined they play, they're not likely to receive many less penalties than the opposition. The first stat I usually look for at half time is the penalty stat, to see how many more penalties the team I am supporting is going to win back or get pinged for in the second half.

Call them like you see it.

- Quicker play the balls
The NRL has taken a good step in the direction of speeding up the play the balls in the last couple of years, which has been one of the better improvements to the game in recent times. I don't watch much Super League but when I do, they seem to have quicker play the balls which is more entertaining to watch. I don't know if it's due to the way the rule is interpreted in the North or if the players simply suck at the wrestle. Maybe it's a bit of both.

I think it could do with a tad more speeding of the play the ball up and less wrestle to make it a bit better.


Honourable mention
- Players not being penalised for taking out the kick chasers
The rule for taking out the attacking kick chaser seems to have relaxed over the last couple of years.
It still receives the odd penalty, though it is very rare.

I think more can be done in this area to make it clearer in what is taking out the attacking player and what isn't.

So what are your thoughts? Do you agree or disagree with the points made and what other rules are in place that you'd like to see interpreted differently?
Would have won Boogs - 2016, 2017, 2018

1 part green, 1 part machine
User avatar
zim
Laurie Daley
Posts: 10639
Joined: July 8, 2015, 3:38 pm
Favourite Player: NRL: Joseph Tapine
NRLW: Grace Kemp
Location: Sydney

Re: Rule Interpretations You'd Like to See Enforced

Post by zim »

My pet peeves:

- Charge downs being counted as 6 again. Being rewarded for your **** play and the defender being punished for his good work is not the right way to go.
- Excellent cut in half leg tackles being penalised for not immediately letting go. They made an excellent tackle, they should have the chance to get up and get to marker before you blow your immediate penalty.

You must hate watching the sharks side haha. Wade Graham is a serial off the mark player of the ball.
User avatar
Rick
Steve Walters
Posts: 7525
Joined: August 11, 2008, 3:56 pm
Favourite Player: Daley
Location: Darwin

Re: Rule Interpretations You'd Like to See Enforced

Post by Rick »

Cracker of a post and spot on. Only thing I would add is forward passes specifically those from dummy half. Some teams are doing it all game and the defensive side either needs to let them make a break or tackle without the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
User avatar
FuiFui BradBrad
Bradley Clyde
Posts: 8651
Joined: May 3, 2008, 10:23 pm
Favourite Player: Phil Graham
Location: Marsden Park

Re: Rule Interpretations You'd Like to See Enforced

Post by FuiFui BradBrad »

"Third Party Sponsorship may not be negotiated by the club as an incentive for a player to sign a contract, nor can they be guaranteed by the club."

*Ahem* Broncos *Ahem*
Feel free to call me RickyRicky StickStick if you like. I will also accept Super Fui, King Brad, Kid Dynamite, Chocolate-Thunda... or Brad.

Nickman's love of NSW
  • NSW has done a superb job - 18/12/2020
  • NSW has been world-class with their approach to date, that's a fact. - 04/02/2021
User avatar
gerg
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12618
Joined: June 24, 2008, 4:22 pm

Re: Rule Interpretations You'd Like to See Enforced

Post by gerg »

You've listed some great examples there. For me it's all about consistency because currently and for quite some time there has been none. A huge one which affected our side last year was the penalty associated with touching referees and captains stalling referees by talking to them. The NRL setup clear rules around these two issues but somehow Thurston, Smith and Gallen get away with it.
Shoving it in your face since 2017
User avatar
pickles
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5145
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by pickles »

I would agree with most of these points and there are some clear examples where consistent application of the rule would stamp it out quickly.

Walking off the mark wouldn't even need to be penalized if players were consistently sent back to the mark to play the ball they would stop doing it as it would always result in a slow play of the ball and would be coached out of them in 2 weeks.

While you only have it an honorable mention I hate the way chasers are constantly run off the ball. You basically need to tackle someone to get penalized. If you are looking for the player and changing your line it's a penalty, simple. It also robs our game of contested kicks which are one of the great spectacles of the game! It probably irks me more given how often it happens to croker!

Speed of the ruck is where there needs to be a balance. I think it was during the super league year that they made the ruck too fast and it meant that teams just ran from dummy half as it was an easy 10 every time and made the game fast but boring and predictable. It was like Elliot coached every team!

What does bother me is players waiting for the held call to complete the tackle. If you go on with the tackle after a held call it should be a penalty. Not the situation where the player is on their way down as held is called but the clear case when extra effort is put in after the call.

Especially for wrestling tackles where the player is deliberately being held up an earlier held call would speed things up enough for mine.

With the legs tackle it depends on the situation and I think you need to look at momentum. If a player has made a break and is pulled down in a legs tackle, or any tackle really, they should be allowed to play the ball fast. If it is in the line more leeway should be given.

Almost impossible to police the ruck consistently and has been the same for the more than 30 years I've been watching league!
User avatar
greeneyed
Don Furner
Posts: 145104
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by greeneyed »

Agree on speed of the ruck pickles. I get annoyed with the referees refereeing to "momentum" too... they're too quick to penalise in favour of the team with "momentum"... in fact they end up generating it.
Image
User avatar
Matt
Don Furner
Posts: 38868
Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
Favourite Player: Time for the new breed Savage, Mooney, Timoko
Location: Canberra

Re: Rule Interpretations You'd Like to See Enforced

Post by Matt »

Rick wrote:Cracker of a post and spot on. Only thing I would add is forward passes specifically those from dummy half. Some teams are doing it all game and the defensive side either needs to let them make a break or tackle without the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Yep, add forward passes from dummy half. It has become a 'required skill' (as in, able to get away with it) for top flight hookers.
User avatar
Matt
Don Furner
Posts: 38868
Joined: May 18, 2010, 4:17 pm
Favourite Player: Time for the new breed Savage, Mooney, Timoko
Location: Canberra

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by Matt »

pickles wrote:I would agree with most of these points and there are some clear examples where consistent application of the rule would stamp it out quickly.

Walking off the mark wouldn't even need to be penalized if players were consistently sent back to the mark to play the ball they would stop doing it as it would always result in a slow play of the ball and would be coached out of them in 2 weeks.

While you only have it an honorable mention I hate the way chasers are constantly run off the ball. You basically need to tackle someone to get penalized. If you are looking for the player and changing your line it's a penalty, simple. It also robs our game of contested kicks which are one of the great spectacles of the game! It probably irks me more given how often it happens to croker!

Speed of the ruck is where there needs to be a balance. I think it was during the super league year that they made the ruck too fast and it meant that teams just ran from dummy half as it was an easy 10 every time and made the game fast but boring and predictable. It was like Elliot coached every team!

What does bother me is players waiting for the held call to complete the tackle. If you go on with the tackle after a held call it should be a penalty. Not the situation where the player is on their way down as held is called but the clear case when extra effort is put in after the call.

Especially for wrestling tackles where the player is deliberately being held up an earlier held call would speed things up enough for mine.

With the legs tackle it depends on the situation and I think you need to look at momentum. If a player has made a break and is pulled down in a legs tackle, or any tackle really, they should be allowed to play the ball fast. If it is in the line more leeway should be given.

Almost impossible to police the ruck consistently and has been the same for the more than 30 years I've been watching league!
Yep, add:
1. Blockers
2. Ruck consistency stuff, esp the "held' then taken to ground thing.
julian87
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13940
Joined: October 20, 2005, 3:35 pm

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by julian87 »

I don't think we need quicker play the balls at all honestly.
well, I guess you could say that I'm buy curious.
julian87
Laurie Daley
Posts: 13940
Joined: October 20, 2005, 3:35 pm

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by julian87 »

The one thing I'd really like to see in rugby league is less rewards for group tackles. You can lay some **** out with an astoundingly big, perfect one on one tackle and you have to give up a quick play the ball. Absolute nonsense.
well, I guess you could say that I'm buy curious.
User avatar
Sid
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9937
Joined: May 15, 2015, 8:47 pm
Favourite Player: Shannon Boyd
Location: Darwin, N.T.

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by Sid »

A lot of fantastic comments raised in this thread including some obvious points that I had missed.
Would have won Boogs - 2016, 2017, 2018

1 part green, 1 part machine
User avatar
-TW-
Mal Meninga
Posts: 35369
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by -TW- »

Play the ball square, there was one where Ferguson was diagonal to the markers the other night
User avatar
pickles
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5145
Joined: November 18, 2007, 2:04 pm
Location: Callala Bay

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by pickles »

julian87 wrote:The one thing I'd really like to see in rugby league is less rewards for group tackles. You can lay some **** out with an astoundingly big, perfect one on one tackle and you have to give up a quick play the ball. Absolute nonsense.
They tried to deal with this by classifying each tackle as either dominant, submission or normal. Surprisingly the consistency wasn't great!

My preferred method is for the referee to call held every tackle. It still won't be consistent but at least it will be clear to everyone when they have deemed the tackle complete.

With group tackles teams are finding ways to combat it and will only get better. Late offloads are a great weapon but also forwards ball playing at line to get into space or playing with width in early tackles. I think in time it will sort itself out.
User avatar
gangrenous
Laurie Daley
Posts: 16589
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by gangrenous »

I would like to see voluntary tackles enforced or the rule altered. If a player is allowed to surrender then the attackers shouldn't be able to drop into their backs like happens now.
User avatar
Ginga
Clinton Schifcofske
Posts: 561
Joined: December 9, 2016, 4:24 pm

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by Ginga »

The one on one/legs tackle is my bugbear as I don't think I've seen a more penalised type of tackle. Just a quick little Michael Hancock type movement from tackled player on the ground means you pretty much had to let go two tackles earlier to avoid giving a penalty away
Rusta
Tom Learoyd-Lahrs
Posts: 54
Joined: April 2, 2011, 10:09 pm
Favourite Player: Milford

Re: Rule interpretations you'd like to see enforced

Post by Rusta »

Bring in 5 min bin and make it ice hockey style. If the opposition scores a try, the binned player comes back on. Refs more likely to use it as it's not as big a punishment as a straight binning. Also, refs to stop saying 'next one sits down', only to blow more penalties without consequence. Add to my peeves, Cam Smith also managing to get his arm 'accidentally' trapped around the ball when defending. Just penalise him already

Sent from my Nexus 5X using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Post Reply