Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Obstructions


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,859 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 01:44 PM

Can we call an amnesty on the sad attempts to find an obscure obstruction in every try scored in a TV game? This is one area where TV games are playing to a different set of rules to other games, and indeed to diferent parts of the pitch (when no try is scored). There was absolutely no trace of an obstruction in that first Leeds try, but if one attacker had stepped half a step out of line you can bet the VR would have found it. It inhibits off-the-cuff play because eventually you reach a point where a try is only legitimate if you have thirteen men all running straight in a solid line.

Go back to the old measure, and while you're at it bin the shoulder charge ban.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#2 Leeds Wire

Leeds Wire
  • Coach
  • 3,895 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 06:52 PM

Agreed on both counts. I often think we desperately try to find fault with tries where none exists. Also, a well timed shoulder charge often brings the biggest cheer of the match.

I'd also change the rule on kicking dead by the team in possession which I still believe rewards negative play. It should be 'ball back' in my view from anywhere outside the 20 metre defensive area, in order to encourage more Phil Blake-esque chipping and suchlike instead of a 'lets get out of here' kick that goes dead.

#3 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,454 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 06:54 PM

Can we call an amnesty on the sad attempts to find an obscure obstruction in every try scored in a TV game? This is one area where TV games are playing to a different set of rules to other games, and indeed to diferent parts of the pitch (when no try is scored). There was absolutely no trace of an obstruction in that first Leeds try, but if one attacker had stepped half a step out of line you can bet the VR would have found it. It inhibits off-the-cuff play because eventually you reach a point where a try is only legitimate if you have thirteen men all running straight in a solid line.

Go back to the old measure, and while you're at it bin the shoulder charge ban.

 

You were doing so well until the last line.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#4 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,347 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 08:44 PM

The refs are applying the law just as the coaches requested it should be interpreted. The RFL asked them to implement it. 

 

Maybe the refs are just showing up the coaches as idiots.

 

Refs don't make laws*, they merely apply them.

 

 

 

 

*Steve Ganson being the obvious exception.



Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#5 Wiltshire Rhino

Wiltshire Rhino
  • Coach
  • 2,378 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 11:18 PM

VR should rule on grounding and going into touch only. The rest should be decided by the on field ref.
2014 Challenged Cup Winner

#6 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,347 posts

Posted 26 April 2014 - 11:23 PM

VR should rule on grounding and going into touch only. The rest should be decided by the on field ref.

 

Until a blatant other offence against your team shows up whilst watching that a foot didn't go in touch. Then the debate starts all over again.



Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#7 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 05:12 AM

I don't agree with the enforcement of the obstruction laws this season. However I've been pleasantly surprised at how consistent refs have been with the "inside / outside" shoulder interpretations relative to the receipt of the pass. Nevertheless I still think the primary judgement should be whether the defender commits to the dummy runner or is taken out, but accept that remains subjective.

The prime example of my mixed feelings about the current rules was Saints disallowed try on Good Friday. It was clearly the right decision based on the position of pass reception relative to dummy runner alone. However I think the defender should have the main responsibility for the defensive misread and not sliding across initially. If the latter was taken into consideration then it should've been a try.

Edited by giwildgo, 27 April 2014 - 05:14 AM.

Posted Image


oderint dum metuant


#8 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,859 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 09:27 AM

You were doing so well until the last line.


I've made my views on this one clear before. Tackling the head or neck, intentional or otherwise, and regardless of where 'first contact' was made, was already outlawed. The problem we had was that refs weren't policing it, or were letting people off on a technicality because they'd grazed the ball/elbow/shoulder of the ball-carrier first. Now we see players penalised at times when the ball-carriers has run into them and they've turned the body; sometimes, even after the attacker has passed or kicked the ball.

As for Giwildgo's point, Ive no problem with the consistency of the VR's, but the application is exacerbating the difference between the law for play in the middle of the field, say, and that of a try-scoring act. And of course, only in TV games.

As for Leeds Wire's point about kicking the ball dead, it would be interesting to see a few different rules piloted on that one. I've always thought the 'cleanest' solution would just be to move the restart forward to the 30m line. Quick restarts should always be permitted, too.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#9 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,735 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 09:30 AM

In my view,  and from the games I've seen this season, the new interpretation appears to have drastically reduced the use of the obstructive dummy runner tactic,. If so, this is a GOOD THING.



#10 Marv Woodburn

Marv Woodburn
  • Coach
  • 1,125 posts

Posted 27 April 2014 - 11:41 AM

In my view,  and from the games I've seen this season, the new interpretation appears to have drastically reduced the use of the obstructive dummy runner tactic,. If so, this is a GOOD THING.

you are correct, the way dummy runners or whatever you want to call them are used these days is the reason the obstruction rule has had to be looked at, it may not be perfect but at least we are looking at it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users